No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Kant, the Nation-State, and Immigration
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 March 2024
Abstract
Kant is invariably read by his followers as antipathetic to all forms of nationalism. Yet he was interested in differences of national character and used an organic metaphor to explain why states should not be broken up or annexed (unfortunately he never commented explicitly on the dismemberment of Poland by Prussia and its allies). He favoured a plural world in which national differences of language and religion prevented the emergence of despotic world government. So his acknowledgement of a limited obligation to provide refuge to vulnerable people should not be amplified into an acceptance of culturally disruptive mass migration.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Kantian Review
References
Benhabib, Seyla (2004) The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents, and Citizens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah (1996) ‘Kant as an unfamiliar source of nationalism’. In Hardy, Henry (ed.), The Sense of Reality (London: Chatto and Windus), 232–48.Google Scholar
Flikschuh, Katrin and Ypi, Lea (eds) (2014) Kant and Colonialism: Historical and Critical Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (1999) The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, ed. Cronin, Ciaran and de Greiff, Pablo. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hathaway, James (2005) The Rights of Refugees under International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, Jakob (2022) Kant’s Grounded Cosmopolitanism: Original Common Possession and the Right to Visit. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1971) Perpetual peace: a philosophical sketch. In Reiss, Hans (ed.), Kant’s Political Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 93–130.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1996a) The Metaphysics of Morals. Trans. Mary Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1996b) ‘On a supposed right to lie from philanthropy’. In Kant, Immanuel, Practical Philosophy. Trans. Mary Gregor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 611–15.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1999) Correspondence. Trans. Arnulf Zweig. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2007a) ‘Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view’. In Kant, Immanuel, Louden, Robert (eds), Trans. Günter Zöller, Anthropology, History, and Education (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 231–429.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2007b) Postscript to Christian Gottlieb Mielcke’s Lithuanian-German and German-Lithuanian Dictionary. In Kant, Immanuel and Louden, Robert (eds), Trans. Günter Zöller, Anthropology, History, and Education (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 430–1.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2012) Lectures on Anthropology. Wood, Allen and Louden, Robert (eds), Trans. Robert Clewis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2016) ‘Drafts for Towards Perpetual Peace
’. In Lectures and Drafts on Political Philosophy, ed. Frederick Rauscher, tr. Frederick Rauscher and Kenneth Westphal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 207–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline (2000) ‘Kantian patriotism’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 29, 313–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline (2012) Kant and Cosmopolitanism: The Philosophical Idea of World Citizenship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kuehn, Manfred (2001) Kant: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kupś, Tomasz (2022) ‘Kant about Poles, Poles about Kant. The hidden reception of German philosophy in Poland in the early 19th century’. Studia Philosophica Kantiana, 11, 7–28.Google Scholar
Mertens, Thomas (1996) ‘Cosmopolitanism and citizenship: Kant against Habermas’. European Journal of Philosophy, 4, 328–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, David (2016) ‘Neo-Kantian theories of self-determination: a critique’. Review of International Studies, 42, 858–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, David (2020) ‘The nature and limits of the duty of rescue’. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 17, 320–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, David (2021) ‘Controlling immigration in the name of self-determination’. In Santos Campos, Andre and Cadilha, Susana (eds), Sovereignty as Value (London: Rowman and Littlefield), 167–82.Google Scholar
Miller, David (2022) ‘What Kant might have said about immigration: an alternative view’, Studi Kantiani, 35, 177–86.Google Scholar
Müller, Jan-Werner (2007) Constitutional Patriotism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, Karoline (2019) Migration und Weltbürgerrecht. Zur Aktualität der politischen Philosophie Kants. Freiburg/München: Karl Alber Verlag.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, Karoline (2022) ‘A right to migrate? On the virtue of productive disharmony’. Studi Kantiani, 35, 167–76.Google Scholar
Renzo, Massimo (2021) ‘National defence and the value of independence’. In Herlin-Karnell, Ester and Rossi, Enzo (eds), The Public Uses of Coercion and Force: From Constitutionalism to War (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 103–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripstein, Arthur (2009) Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schulze, Hagen (1991) The Course of German Nationalism: From Frederick the Great to Bismarck 1763–1867. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stilz, Anna (2021) ‘The moral basis of state independence’. In Herlin-Karnell, Ester and Rossi, Enzo (eds), The Public Uses of Coercion and Force: From Constitutionalism to War (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 52–63.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy (2010) ‘Two conceptions of self-determination’. In Besson, Samantha and Tasioulas, John (eds), The Philosophy of International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 397–413.Google Scholar